Science, one of the world’s most prestigious scientific journals, published an article last week querying whether scientists should include "positionality statements" when publishing their research.

The purpose of a "positionality statement" is to offer details about the author’s personal characteristics, such as their race , sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, and geographic location, among others. The practice originated in the social sciences with the goal of improving "inclusivity" and drawing attention to power imbalances, especially if a scientist isn’t part of the community he or she is studying.

What I find most disturbing about this trend is not only that positionality statements are being taken seriously by journals and academics alike, but that they’ve become a growing requirement in STEM disciplines. They affect not just the publication process of research studies but also master’s theses and doctoral dissertations.

Many scientists have been openly critical of these types of initiatives, as there has yet to be any proof that self-disclosing personal information in this way achieves its stated purpose. We can agree it’s important for scientists to be sensitive to the concerns of minority communities and to be aware of possible biases in their work, but a study should be evaluated on the quality of the research itself, not the identity markers of the people who conducted it. Between designing studies, collecting data, applying for grants, and teaching, academic scientists already have more than enough on their plates. Any precious free time they do have should be devoted, firstly, toward staying sane in such a fast-paced environment, and secondly, to applying for additional funding so they remain gainfully employed and able to pursue new lines of research.

When reading scientists’ positionality statements, I can’t help but feel extremely uncomfortable, as though I’m reading a hostage statement. It comes across as out-of-place and invasive to read detailed descriptions about a researcher’s racial background, age, socioeconomic status, where they grew up, and other erroneous tidbits about their life, while simultaneously knowing they likely had to declare this information to have their findings published or to graduate.

The current ideological obsession with replacing objectivity and excellence with diversity, equity, and inclusion fanaticism will only derail future scientific achievement. It will deter anyone belonging to so-called "over-represented" groups, particularly white and Asian men, from pursuing scientific endeavors regardless of how competent or passionate they are. They'll risk coming to believe that the value of their work won’t be based on merit but rather on the circumstances they were born into.